Open scoring, are you for or against?

[TitoFan]

A poll on this would've been nice. So far there's

12 - against
1 - for
2 - straddling the fence


I wonder how this compares to the general public.

[bzkfn]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

[DavilaJones]

I guess the only pro. I can think of is that a boxer will now when he's being robbed and knows that if he has no hopes of winning on scorecard he can go all out and try to get a KO.

That being said I much rather if no robbery were to take place and open scoring gives a whole new meaning to 4 corner post offense. So.....I'm against it.

[beenKOed]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

[IamInuit]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

[Galaxy]

Totally against

[beenKOed]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

We were not watching the same fight--I've said this before--I did not see Trout fold up, slow down, or do anything except intensify his efforts after the KD in the 7th, after the 8th he was pushing Alvarez hard. Alvarez was tired, but he stepped up and intensified his own efforts. If the fight went 15, I think Trout had a very good chance.
That's the fight I saw.
Open scoring could be a good thing for boxing, let's give it try.

[Violent Demise]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

If that's the case than didn't deserve to win and doesn't deserve to be call champion. After the 8th he had 4 rounds to go all out for the knock out. And didn't. He should of done what Pernell Whitaker did to Diobleys Hurtado when he was behind. And keep in mind Whitaker was even less of a knock out fighter than Trout

[IamInuit]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

We were not watching the same fight--I've said this before--I did not see Trout fold up, slow down, or do anything except intensify his efforts after the KD in the 7th, after the 8th he was pushing Alvarez hard. Alvarez was tired, but he stepped up and intensified his own efforts. If the fight went 15, I think Trout had a very good chance.
That's the fight I saw.
Open scoring could be a good thing for boxing, let's give it try.

I guess so because I saw a noticeable difference in Trout like a bag with the air let out after the eighth. I do not like the system or what it does to the fighters even though I think judging needs a refit. There is no sense going on about it. People can watch the fight for themselves and give it a grade on its influence. To me its as dimwitted as the half point idea.

Oh and I also noticed a difference in Alvarez around the same time. If his fans didn't so be it.

[TitoFan]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

If that's the case than didn't deserve to win and doesn't deserve to be call champion. After the 8th he had 4 rounds to go all out for the knock out. And didn't. He should of done what Pernell Whitaker did to Diobleys Hurtado when he was behind. And keep in mind Whitaker was even less of a knock out fighter than Trout

You "go for the knockout"..... and it's sometimes the quickest way to get knocked out yourself. Knockouts are like homeruns in baseball. They come by themselves. To be forced to abandon your gameplan because you have to go for the homerun is just stupid. For someone who likes to accuse everyone of "not knowing shit about boxing"...... you certainly know even less than shit.

[Violent Demise]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

If that's the case than didn't deserve to win and doesn't deserve to be call champion. After the 8th he had 4 rounds to go all out for the knock out. And didn't. He should of done what Pernell Whitaker did to Diobleys Hurtado when he was behind. And keep in mind Whitaker was even less of a knock out fighter than Trout

You "go for the knockout"..... and it's sometimes the quickest way to get knocked out yourself. Knockouts are like homeruns in baseball. They come by themselves. To be forced to abandon your gameplan because you have to go for the homerun is just stupid. For someone who likes to accuse everyone of "not knowing shit about boxing"...... you certainly know even less than shit.

He's losing the fucking fight. And he knows he's losing the fight. So obviously the game-plan isn't fucking working. And you think he should continue following that same losing game-plan? Now you see what I'm talking about when I say you're a fucking idiot? I don't say it just cuz I enjoy it. I say it cuz it's fucking true. Do yourself a favor and go watch the Pernell Whitaker-Diobleys Hurtado fight. And tell me Whitaker would of still won the fight is he kept following his original game-plan

[TitoFan]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

If that's the case than didn't deserve to win and doesn't deserve to be call champion. After the 8th he had 4 rounds to go all out for the knock out. And didn't. He should of done what Pernell Whitaker did to Diobleys Hurtado when he was behind. And keep in mind Whitaker was even less of a knock out fighter than Trout

You "go for the knockout"..... and it's sometimes the quickest way to get knocked out yourself. Knockouts are like homeruns in baseball. They come by themselves. To be forced to abandon your gameplan because you have to go for the homerun is just stupid. For someone who likes to accuse everyone of "not knowing shit about boxing"...... you certainly know even less than shit.

He's losing the fucking fight. And he knows he's losing the fight. So obviously the game-plan isn't fucking working. And you think he should continue following that same losing game-plan? Now you see what I'm talking about when I say you're a fucking idiot? I don't say it just cuz I enjoy it. I say it cuz it's fucking true. Do yourself a favor and go watch the Pernell Whitaker-Diobleys Hurtado fight. And tell me Whitaker would of still won the fight is he kept following his original game-plan

No open scoring. Not for the fans... not for the fighter. What part of that don't you understand, shit for brains? You think you get a free pass on your stupidity because you call yourself "violent"? What the fuck is wrong with you? Leave the judges scoring the way it is. If you're gonna do anything, improve the quality of judging. Who the fuck wants the beneficiary (more than 2 syllables, I know... sorry) of the open scoring to be skating around waiting for the final bell? Fight till the end. You think you're losing... be more aggresive. You need it in ghetto? Let me know, dumb fuck.

By the way, moron.... the question was: "Open scoring, for or against?" Not strictly about Canelo-Trout. Can your pea-sized brain comprehend that? Who the fuck wants to watch fights where one fighter is told in the 8th round... "The only way you can win is by knockout"? So we can watch one guy go for broke while the other one gets on his bike for 4 rounds? And you think you know boxing? What a fucking loser.

[Violent Demise]

Sam Peter stayed on his stool because he was getting his ass kicked.
Every pro sport is entertainment.
You weren't watching the same Canelo vs Trout fight I was, when Trout learned the official score his intensity jumped and if that fight had been 15 rounds I think he would have won.
Open scoring might be wrong for boxing, but I want to see it get a real trial.

My argument was that Alvarez' took away the entertainment factor and boxed off the back foot rather than in his usual come forward style. If he hadn't have known, he wouldn't have coasted and would have continue to press for the finish. You want to see fighters try for 12 rounds, and open scoring often elimanates this.

Sir, how can one fighter kickback and relax when the other fighter is stepping up his intensity, now that's the beauty of open scoring. When the losing fighter starts fighting harder, the only thing the winning fighter can do is fight harder. Oh, hell yes brother, that's the beauty of open scoring.
Open scoring, a beautiful thing!!!!

Give me one example of that happening in a fight? It certainly did not happen Saturday night. Once Trout was told that he was behind 6 rounds in round 8 he mentally folded and did not step up his intensity.It may have appeared that way a bit but its only because Alvarez stopped trying to impose his will.Oh hell no brother,that's the danger of open scoring and its a double edged sword and especially the guy who actually believed he was in the fight and possibly winning it. I can see the example you raised had they told Trout he was behind a point or two but that's not what happened.

If that's the case than didn't deserve to win and doesn't deserve to be call champion. After the 8th he had 4 rounds to go all out for the knock out. And didn't. He should of done what Pernell Whitaker did to Diobleys Hurtado when he was behind. And keep in mind Whitaker was even less of a knock out fighter than Trout

You "go for the knockout"..... and it's sometimes the quickest way to get knocked out yourself. Knockouts are like homeruns in baseball. They come by themselves. To be forced to abandon your gameplan because you have to go for the homerun is just stupid. For someone who likes to accuse everyone of "not knowing shit about boxing"...... you certainly know even less than shit.

He's losing the fucking fight. And he knows he's losing the fight. So obviously the game-plan isn't fucking working. And you think he should continue following that same losing game-plan? Now you see what I'm talking about when I say you're a fucking idiot? I don't say it just cuz I enjoy it. I say it cuz it's fucking true. Do yourself a favor and go watch the Pernell Whitaker-Diobleys Hurtado fight. And tell me Whitaker would of still won the fight is he kept following his original game-plan

No open scoring. Not for the fans... not for the fighter. What part of that don't you understand, shit for brains? You think you get a free pass on your stupidity because you call yourself "violent"? What the fuck is wrong with you? Leave the judges scoring the way it is. If you're gonna do anything, improve the quality of judging. Who the fuck wants the beneficiary (more than 2 syllables, I know... sorry) of the open scoring to be skating around waiting for the final bell? Fight till the end. You think you're losing... be more aggresive. You need it in ghetto? Let me know, dumb fuck.

By the way, moron.... the question was: "Open scoring, for or against?" Not strictly about Canelo-Trout. Can your pea-sized brain comprehend that? Who the fuck wants to watch fights where one fighter is told in the 8th round... "The only way you can win is by knockout"? So we can watch one guy go for broke while the other one gets on his bike for 4 rounds? And you think you know boxing? What a fucking loser.

"Open scoring, for or against?" No shit stupid. What I'm doing providing a situation in which it's beneficial to a fighter. That's call making a boxing point. Something you can't do cuz you don't know the sport. All you do is say no, no and no. And proceed to show everybody how retarded you really are by saying no one wants to see a fighter go for broke. You don't comment on the points provided because you're incapable of comprehending them. The points provided go completely over your head. You were asked to comment on the Whitaker-Hurtado fight and you couldn't do it cuz you don't even know who the fuck Pernell Whitaker is.

[TitoFan]

Here's the published opinion of someone NOT called TitoFan, regarding open scoring:



Why Boxing Must Not Employ an Open Scoring System | Bleacher Report



By the way, of course I know who Whitaker is......